Yes, you could run two 60*45 pitches running cross ways in each half of a max dimension field. But from a practical perspective you wouldn’t play a senior club match on fields either that small or that large. I’d guess most are international standard +/- 10m in length, width or both.
I like that baseball isn’t timed and that it never has ties.
Oops, that should have read 90 * 45m
Neither does tennis or squash
Bowling side is defensive? I am sure lots of Batmen who faced Waqar Younis at 100 mph would beg to disagree.
Hockey goals are not immovable, which was one of the requirements. Granted the puck won’t move one, but if a player slides into one, it moves.
However, the bases in baseball don’t move during the course of a game, and if the ball hits one, it’s still in play.
Wife carrying is the only racing sport where the rider doesn’t direct the “steed.”
I posted a thread about this a while back but I can’t find it…
I think baseball may be one of the only sports where there is no gain from intentional fouling.
I’ll try to explain myself…we all know that in basketball and football, intentional fouls are part of the strategy. Throwing a ball out of bounds, striking another player, etc. Putting the ball out of bounds in soccer too (not sure if intentional fouling gets you anything good in soccer?) Hockey doesn’t have out-of-bounds but I think you can strategize to go offsides to get play stopped and the puck at a particular position.
I MAY have just stipulated team sports in my original thread, but I seem to recall when discussing the topic with my friends that we came up with beneficial intentional fouling scenarios in other sports like golf, tennis and bowling.
If anyone wants to discuss it, feel free 
Re: intentional fouling in baseball:
I can think of a couple of situations were intentional fouls have a strategic purpose:
- Beanballs: usually used on the 3rd, 4th or other RBI-threatening batter if there is no one standing on first base. Also, can be used on a better hitter to get to a worse hitter. Taking a bean is also strategic.
- Running into the fielder: normal on plays at home base, it is also a staple for breaking up double plays at 2nd.
There’s no penalty for either of those things, tho. It’s not an error if you hit a batter, and nothing goes in the stats if you clobber a fielder.
Baseball is the only sport where being left-handed is a distinct, quantitative, and strategic advantage other than just being for the element of surprise.
I’m not sure of the exact rule about beaning, but about 10 years ago or so pitchers and benches were given warnings about retaliation, and pitchers can be ejected from the game for intentionally throwing at the batter.
In the scorebook, HBP is the abbreviation for “hit by pitch.”
Only American professional sport maybe.
Ample other examples of distinct and strategic in other sports.
And if it is quantifiable, precisely how many home runs advantage does a left hander have over a right hander?
The distance to run to first base from the batter’s box is shorter for players batting left, not to mention the whole righty pitcher/lefty batter thing.
It’s quantifiable because the distance the left handed batter needs to run can be measured to be shorter than the right handed batter.
Edit: missed window:
I should note that playing left handed has advantages in baseball, not necessarily being left handed.
OK, and if the aim of baseball was to get to first base that would be a quantifiable advantage.
And presumably once on base, whether the runner batted left or right has no affect on the the probabilty of getting home. So quantify the advantage of scoring a home run for a left hand hitter over a right hander. 10%, 1%, 0.1%, 0.001%, 0.0001%?
And this is not a straw man argument because…?
Because I’m refuting your argument that “Baseball is the only sport where being left-handed is a distinct, quantitative, and strategic advantage.” on the grounds that it is not the only sport where being (or playing) left handed confers distinct and strategic advantages and you haven’t demonstrated that it is a quantifiable advantage.
The plot for BLADES OF GLORY notwithstanding, Pair Skating requires a man and a lady.
penultima, I see two relatively basic baseball truths that you seem to be missing.
First, although the object of the game is to score runs, getting to first base safely is the most important test of a player’s offensive value. The basic currency of baseball is the out. Getting on base safely means the batter has not made an out. The runs his team can expect to score at that point have increased. Whether a given player scores a run himself is actually less important than the opportunities he creates for, or takes away from, the teammates before and after him in the batting order, by what he does at the plate.
Second, the dynamics of the pitcher-batter contest in baseball consistently (not quite universally, but very typically) produces an advantage for opposite-handed batters facing pitchers of a given hand. That is, left-handed batters hit better against right-handed pitchers, and vice-versa. It’s a function of the way pitches tend to move and batters tend to perceive them. This is really the main source of LHB value in baseball, not so much the stuff about LHB being closer to first base. It’s simply that, although there are more LH playing baseball than in the general population, the baseball population is still predominantly right-handed. A left-handed (or switch) batter will have more opportunities to make this basic dynamic work for him. This is measurable in several statistical categories, for example a .011 batting average advantage for LHB vs. RHP in MLB in 2009. That’s about the same BA difference as between the top teams and the league average.